Germans I don't know why you are so insistent on this tangent. Counties make guarantees all the time, the USA readily makes guarantees not to seek the death penalty when seeking extradition...

(December 10, 2012 at 8:01 am)Stue Denim Wrote: I feel that I answered those questions in my previous posts (minus the "as soon as he is on swedish soil", the timing is hardly the issue). Admittedly I do post and then edit as I can never get it quite right and am never happy with the way it reads, and your post is one minute before my final edit. Still, I refer you to my above posts.

Indeed, I missed that edited part. Thank you for reminding.

Quote:But pointing to this law would seem to indicate that extradition is an option. You could ask for a guarantee from a country asking that they won't literally crucify you if you came in for questioning, how many would point to laws that say they can't predetermine cases, how many would point to their own laws and agreements showing how they are prohibited from executing or torturing people? If Swedish law ruled out any chance of him being extradited to the US, they would surely just point to that. That they can't and won't is a worrying sign. If he was asking for a guarantee that sweden wouldn't personally torture him, I don't doubt they would say "we can't torture you, look at these laws that prohibit us from doing so" rather than "oh sorry, we can't predetermine these things, look at these laws that stop us from predetermining judicial decisions."




Were I in his position (and I find the whole thing very very suss) I would stay well away from Sweden.

Oh the extradition to the US is an option. But Sweden is bound by it`s membership to the EU high court not to do so, it might do so, but it will be (and that is what everyone ignores) very damaging for Sweden - because the european high court can then call out sanctions against sweden and demand reparations.

Fact is they could - but it wouldnt be a productive thing to do and would actualy have very damaging effects for Sweden. This is the point which makes this guarantee so impossible, if Sweden would give him that guarantee on the basis of the decision of the european high court - it would give up it`s sovereignty over it`s laws to the european high court, if it would give him that guarantee on the basis that he wants it - it`s courts would give in to the demands of a individual non-citizen - which is also not exceptabel - because in that case you would create a example case which someone could use to escapes justice and inquiry on the basis of questioning everything within the justice system and demanding guarantees for everything.

And again, I find it very weird that people think that a nation owes this kind of guarantee to him, the only guarantee it owes him, is the guarantee of a fair trial and human treatment.

What limitations there are to the swedish juristiction should not be determined by an individual and certainly not by that individuals narcecism.

(December 10, 2012 at 8:14 am)Aractus Wrote: Germans I don't know why you are so insistent on this tangent. Counties make guarantees all the time, the USA readily makes guarantees not to seek the death penalty when seeking extradition...

By simply calling my arguments and explainations tangent..... you do not make them invalid - this can only be achieved through counterarguments which refute the original ones.

Show me the specific cases in which the US goverment - made a guarantee to an individual wanted for crimes?

They've done it with criminals extradited from Australia since we're officially opposed to the death penalty. It's a different type of guarantee than what Assange is asking - but the very fact is the charges that he would be on in the USA - conspiracy to commit espionage - is a totally bogus charge just like providing material support to terrorism. No country in the world should recognize such a charge as legitimate.

We are talking about Europe here. Not Australia. Assange is in the Ecuadorian embessey in London and is demanden to be extradited by Sweden - which is in Europe - not in Australia - get it? must I paint picture?

The European high court of justice forbids it`s member nations to extradite individuals into nations where they would face the death penalty.

Nations can still ignore that ruling by the high court since the high court cannot undermine the sovereignty of an independent nation and it`s juristiction. But doing so will lead to the high court issuing sanctions and possible penalty payments against Sweden which all other member nations of the european high court have to follow.

Assange is in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, UK.

thanks will edit

TGAC, you've not justified the obvious discontinuities between EAW conditions and the Swedish legal process.

Nor have you justified their lack of questioning under MLA to allow for formal charging under EAW that would make an EAW unconditionally valid.

Judges allow illegal things often.

(December 10, 2012 at 10:12 am)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: We are talking about Europe here. Not Australia. Assange is in the Ecuadorian embessey in London and is demanden to be extradited by Sweden - which is in Europe - not in Australia - get it? must I paint picture?

The European high court of justice forbids it`s member nations to extradite individuals into nations where they would face the death penalty.

Nations can still ignore that ruling by the high court since the high court cannot undermine the sovereignty of an independent nation and it`s juristiction. But doing so will lead to the high court issuing sanctions and possible penalty payments against Sweden which all other member nations of the european high court have to follow.

Why don't you listen to what you say. If it is illegal for Sweden to extradite to the USA then they can give a guarantee can't they?

(December 10, 2012 at 3:40 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: TGAC, you've not justified the obvious discontinuities between EAW conditions and the Swedish legal process.

Nor have you justified their lack of questioning under MLA to allow for formal charging under EAW that would make an EAW unconditionally valid.

Judges allow illegal things often.

Now I know this will read very silly but what is MLA and EAW a acronym for?

Modern language assosiation?

EAW Empire at War (Star Wars video game)
EAW Environmental Assessment Worksheet (Minnesota)
EAW European Arrest Warrant (also seen as EUAW)
EAW Expeditionary Air Wing
EAW Employment At Will
EAW Eastern Acoustic Works, Inc.
EAW Environmentally A-Ware
EAW Economic Analysis Worksheet (California)
EAW Electronic and Acoustic Warfare
EAW Electrically Aimable Warhead
EAW Etch Rate Across the Wafer
EAW Exercise and Wellness

?

I will just take it as if you mean European Arrest Warrant.

And there I will have to ask: Are you certain that an arrest warant cannot be put out for an individual for questioning under Swedish law?

If you can point out to me that under Swedisch law a arrest warrent cannot be put out for a individual who isn`t jet charged, but is only wanted for questioning.
Then I will agree that something smells fishy.

Frankly, I dont know if under Swedish law an arrest warrant for the purpose of simply questioning a uncharged individual can be put out.
And I dont know if such an arrest warrant will be accepted by the european high court and gains the status of a european wide arrest warrent - which is determined by the european high court and not by Sweden.

Frankly, the european high court is a institution which for a very long time has insured that nations do not violate human rights - therefor if the warrant is accepted by the european high court as legitemate I dought that it is fishy.

If you can show me that this process is in violation of the swedish law or the standard set by the european high court, then I will accept that.

(December 11, 2012 at 2:58 am)Aractus Wrote: Why don't you listen to what you say. If it is illegal for Sweden to extradite to the USA then they can give a guarantee can't they?

I have explained 3 times why Sweden cannot give such a guarantee and will not explain it again.

Read the previous posts and try to understand it.

If you cant understand it I will try to explain it using a more simple set of phrases.

(December 11, 2012 at 3:11 am)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: I will just take it as if you mean European Arrest Warrant.

I wonder if reading the surrounding context no less than a few posts away would have given you that idea...

(December 11, 2012 at 3:11 am)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: And there I will have to ask: Are you certain that an arrest warant cannot be put out for an individual for questioning under Swedish law?

Article 1, 1 Wrote:1. The European arrest warrant is a judicial decision issued by a Member State with a view to the arrest and surrender by another Member State of a requested person, for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution or executing a custodial sentence or detention order.

REF: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexU...584:EN:NOT

I remember writing this:

(December 10, 2012 at 1:19 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote: However, Swedish authorities claim:

Quote:Assange has not yet been formally charged with any offence.[65] The prosecutor said that, in accordance with the Swedish legal system, formal charges will be laid only after extradition and a second round of questioning. Observers note however that Assange has not yet been interviewed about several of the allegations,[66] including the most serious, and that Swedish law allows interviews to be conducted abroad under Mutual Legal Assistance provisions.[67]

Furthermore, "Swedish law allows interviews to be conducted abroad under Mutual Legal Assistance provisions", however:

Quote:Since 19 June 2012, Assange lives in the Embassy of Ecuador in London, where he had asked for and was granted political asylum.[61] Ecuador offered to allow Swedish prosecutors to question Assange at the Embassy in London, but this was turned down by the Swedish prosecutors.[62] Assange has claimed he would go to Sweden if provided with a diplomatic guarantee that he would not be turned over to the United States[63] but the Swedish foreign ministry stated that Sweden's legislation does not allow any judicial decision like extradition to be predetermined.[64]

(December 11, 2012 at 3:11 am)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: If you can point out to me that under Swedisch law a arrest warrent cannot be put out for a individual who isn`t jet charged, but is only wanted for questioning.
Then I will agree that something smells fishy.

That is irrelevant -- you cannot put out an EAW for the purposes of conducting an investigation. Only for serving a sentence or conducting a prosecution. End of.

(December 11, 2012 at 3:11 am)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: Frankly, I dont know if under Swedish law an arrest warrant for the purpose of simply questioning a uncharged individual can be put out.
And I dont know if such an arrest warrant will be accepted by the european high court and gains the status of a european wide arrest warrent - which is determined by the european high court and not by Sweden.

Frankly, the european high court is a institution which for a very long time has insured that nations do not violate human rights - therefor if the warrant is accepted by the european high court as legitemate I dought that it is fishy.

Interesting use of "long time". It allows you the slippery-ness of claiming that a set of rights violations are such a small number while at the same time conveying the false concept of longevity for the so-called European high-court, which is remarkably young.

(December 11, 2012 at 3:11 am)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: If you can show me that this process is in violation of the swedish law or the standard set by the european high court, then I will accept that.

I outlined the discontinuity between the actual legislation allowing for European Arrest Warrants and the intricacies of Swedish Law. It's fairly obvious the protocol here -- formally charge the man for the purposes of conducting a criminal trial. It has been stated that questioning can take place under mutual legal assistance (MLA) laws.

That would perfectly fit the terms of an EAW.

It's questionable that the basic tenants of the legislation being utilized is not being filled out to the letter in one of the world's most high profile cases.

I find it interesting that you wish to ignore that/